Product Description

`History: Fiction or Science?` is the most explosive tractate on history and chronology ever written.

This book is not another conspiracy theory - every hypothesis it contains is backed by solid scientific data.

The book is well-illustrated, contains 446 graphs and illustrations, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the chronology used nowadays.

You will be amazed to discover: - That the chronology universally taken for granted is indeed wrong; - That this chronology was essentially invented in the XVI-XVII century; - That archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical and carbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts known today are erroneous or non-exact; - That there is not a single document that could be reliably dated earlier than the XIth century; - That Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy; - That Jesus Christ may have been born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD; - That the Old Testament is probably a rendition of Middle Ages events; - That the Old Europe is not as ancient as it claims.

Henry Ford once said: "History is more or less bunk". Leading Mathematician Anatoly Fomenko proved it.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #401198 in Books
• Published on: 2004-03
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 624 pages

Review
..deals with a very serious issue directly affecting humanity's comprehension of its own past.. -- Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA),July 17, 2004

may appear controversial yet deals with a very serious issue directly affecting humanity's comprehension of its own past. -- Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA),July 17, 2004
July 17, 2004

From the Publisher
"History: Fiction or Science?" crowns 30 years of meticulous and extensive research performed by the eminent mathematician Anatoly Fomenko and his colleagues. This research started in fact as a unbelievable byproduct of russian-american competition in Moon exploration, when famous NASA scientist Robert Newton discovered a very strange phenomenon in lunar mechanics. This book is also the first volume in seven comprising "Chronology", the fundamental oeuvre that exposes and expounds the numerous inveracities of the traditional version of history.

"History: Fiction or Science?" contains data and conclusions that aren’t anything short of revolutionary. The alternatives offered to classical history are stunning, unorthodox to the extent of being labelled heretical by virtually every scholar of history, and daring enough to be considered preposterous at first sight, although this impression never lasts longer than it takes one to read a few pages attentively.

In chapter I we are reminded of when the contemporary chronological scale was created and by whom, with the culprits named as the XVI-XVII century clergy that was in charge of all matters historical in that age. We also learn that the consensual model of history had prominent critics ever since its creation – among them such names as Sir Isaac Newton and Jean Hardouin, chief librarian of Louis XIV, the Sun King of France.

The author dissects every historical age and analyses the data from every source imaginable – Roman and Egyptian chronology take a good beating, and it goes rapidly downhill from there. Poggio Bracciolini and Petrarch take the blame for creating the legend of a mythical Classical age that never was.

The Biblical events are moved a lot closer to us historically, as well as geographically (the Biblical Jerusalem being identified with the mediaeval Constantinople, for instance). The New and the Old Testament swap their positions on the chronological scale, both exposed as referring to mediaeval events. Our perception of history changes dramatically even before we’re through with chapter I.

In chapters II, III and IV the author summons astronomy and statistics to provide proof for his theories, which the latter yield gladly and abundantly, and we discover that our amazement resource was by no means used up in the previous chapter. Apparently, there is some vary valid astronomical proof for the author’s theories in the ancient Egyptian zodiacs, Ptolemy’s Almagest, and the Biblical Book of Revelation.

Chapters V and VI contain in-depth descriptions of the methods used by the author as well as the most meticulous rendition of the global chronological map with its numerous errors and glitches explained in a very level-headed manner – one doesn’t have to be a mathematician to understand, but a great deal of common sense is required for that purpose.

Finally, in chapter VII we learn more about Antiquity and the Middle Ages, and how the division between the two exists in our mind only (which is a hard concept to accept, even though we familiarize ourselves with it at the beginning of the book). If this isn’t enough, the appendices contain all sorts of factual information to appease the sceptics as well as provide fresh New Chronology converts with deadly ammunition for keeping the critics well at bay.

Basically, this is the first successful attempt to finally transform history into a rocket science and a must read for everyone who isn’t entirely indifferent to human history,… and possibly also for those who are.

Dear prospective Reader, we have the pleasure to invite You to use the 'Search Inside' feature to acquaint Youself with the book.

From the Author
The historical discourse appears to enjoy unwavering popularity in an abundance of manifestations. However, we have to ask ourselves this: how often do we question the veracity of the dominating historical discourse? Could it be that the historical inveracities are really a lot graver than the ones inevitably resulting from temporal distance and entropy? What if the passions of Jesus Christ (as we may observe them in Mel Gibson’s rendition coming Christmas) took place in the XI-XII century AD and not in the first? And what if the walls of Troy – the ones that we’re bound to see stormed by Brad Pitt & Co in the nearest future – have really been located elsewhere? Could Troy be identified with Constantinople, for instance? Basically, the main idea behind this is that the chronological scale that we use nowadays is elongated to a great extent and completely arbitrarily, being a collation of several versions of one and the same temporal sequence that eventually became identified with several nonexistent historical periods. It isn’t too hard to label the results of our research "sensationalist drivel", and indeed that seems to be the number one argument offered by the venerable community of fundamentalist historians. However, if we are to think critically and employ both common sense and rationality to the fullest extent and not just nominally, remaining bound by our a priori views and opinions all the while, we shall see numerous holes, gaps, and blanks that the traditional version of history pretends not to notice.

Customer Reviews

Interesting theories that deserve to be explored
I do not agree with everything written in this book. For example, I do not agree with the idea that ankhs are supposed to be Christian crosses. I also disagree with the observations that different objects look like crescents and symbolize Islam. But there are a great number of valid observations contained in the book. Radiocarbon dating is not the science most of us think it is, as put forth in the book. I also have to agree with the author's idea that many pieces of evidence taken from old books and used to date people or events were either false and inserted by later editors, or otherwise erroneous. Let's face facts: the majority of ancient history is conjecture, or "educated guessing". It's about time an author came along and, in the author's own words, "called a spade a spade". Is this book 100% correct? Who knows? Do many of the theses contained within deserve further study? Yes, if history is to be a record of events and not propaganda or fuel for dogma. The more accurate we can make our history books, the better off other sciences will be, especially the humanities and any sciences concerned with gauging human progress in different areas throughout the ages. I give the book three stars mainly because I find some of the ideas put forth to be less than credible (the author shoud enlist other researchers with expertise in those areas besides math and physics), the translation to be not quite perfectly clear in some areas, and I dislike the organization of the book. The three stars are for the rest of the ideas and theories in the book that do make sense and deserve further exploration, or a reasoned rebuttal, especially the mathematical analysis of ancient texts. To the academics who summarily dismiss the book as rubbish...please point us to reasoned explanations. Us grown-ups who can read big words and read a book longer than a paperback novel deserve that much. Also, as an adult in this day and age, I will never just "take someone's word for it". How's that song go.."won't get fooled again!" I am especially waiting for someone to convince me that radiocarbon dating is worth using on objects less than many thousands of years old. I doubt it's going to happen!

A Pretty Wild Theory
This book presents a wildly radical restructuring of the timeline of world history. It is written by an outsider to the world of historical scholarship: Fomenko is a non-historian (a renowned mathematician) and an non-Westerner (from Russia.)

Fomenko's theory says, basically, that everything we are told about history pre-1600 is BS. Ancient history is, according to Fomenko, based on evidence quote-unquote "discovered" since the 15th century and arranged into a spurious standard timeline in the 18th century. (In some cases, the evidence was discovered much more recently: some Eastern religious texts were only uncovered in the 20th century.) Fomenko collates this evidence to argue that all those ancient chronicles are different versions of events which really happened roughly between 1000 AD and 1400 AD. The key event in Fomenko's timeline is the life of Christ (who was born in 1053 AD rather than 6BC, Fomenko believes.) After a relatively short-lived Eurasian empire disintegrated, each nation made up their own version of the empire's history, and generally each new version of the story was set farther back into the past than the previous one. (The newest version is the Hindu Krishna myth which is set about 10,000 years before the present day.)

This is an appealing theory, since it eliminates the various "dark ages" which blemish the conventional chronology. On the other hand, this is an appalling theory, since it creates one big dark age extending from the beginning of time till 900 AD or so.

The book is translated from the Russian. There is no index, and the bibliography is rather annoyingly arranged in the original Russian alphabetical order (so for example, B's and V's are mixed together.) But the translation is extremely readable, more readable than most historical works originally written in English.

This is the first book in a projected 7-volume set.

The online bookstore entries for this volume rather amusingly show easily history gets mixed up. The translator is someone named Michael Jagger who is almost certainly not the singer Mick Jagger (whose full name is Michael Phillip Jagger.) However, some online bookstores do list Mick Jagger as a coauthor. Amazon.com says the translator is someone named Mike Jagupov. This is hard enough to keep straight while the singer is still alive, and a few decades from now, I am sure that many sources will say that the legendary Rolling Stones frontman translated this book into English.

(I have no idea if Mick Jagger speaks Russian or not. Although he is an educated man--- an alumnus of the University of London--- one would assume that he doesn't. Certainly, in all the millions of words which have been written about him, no one has commented on his knowledge of the Russian language. And, if he actually was the person who translated this controversial text into English, the book's publishers would presumably be aggressively advertising that fact.)

Don't review if you haven't read
You learned history when you were a young lad from someone who learned it from someone who..... but who started it all?
What's wrong with asking this question? Some people would burn Mr. Fomenko at the stake for saying the Earth isn't flat.

I bought this book as a novelty but I ended up being quite impressed with it. I wouldn't say I'm totally sold on all the crazy ideas Mr. fomenko puts out but they certainly are more plausable than you might think. He does a thorough job of showing how early "historians" were really working for the pope. Most were monks with limited resources, personal and religious agendas, and a willingness to fudge it whenever they didn't know (or like) the truth. You'll be amazed at how meticulously he presents his evidence that the dark ages were so dark because they never happened. Your head will probably start to ache when you get to the section where he analyzes historical timelines statistically (at least mine did). However, the parallels truly are startling.

The first four chapters alone are worth the price of the book. Even if you don't believe any of it I'm sure you will at least question why we take the foundations of historical knowledge so seriously without solid justification. There's more to this book than you could know without actually reading it!